BACKGROUND: There are limited experimental data on the nature of the humoral response elicited in humans against pig antigens. In this study, we have examined the xenoantibody (XAb) response in eight patients with acute liver failure exposed to pig hepatocytes after treatment with the bioartificial liver (BAL). METHODS: Patients' plasma samples obtained before and after BAL treatment were tested for IgM and IgG XAbs, IgG subclasses, and XAb cytotoxicity, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and flow-cytometric assays. The characterization of pig aortic endothelial cell (PAEC) surface xenoantigens was analyzed by immunoprecipitation. RESULTS: We observed by day 10, a strong anti-pig IgG and IgM XAb response in patients undergoing two or more BAL treatments, with a significant increase in all the IgG subclasses; in contrast, XAb titers did not change if the patients received only one BAL treatment. The majority of the XAbs produced to porcine antigens were primarily specific for the alphaGal epitope. Both IgG and IgM XAbs were cytotoxic to PAECs, and the cytotoxic activity of IgG was associated with high levels of IgG1 and IgG3 subclasses, known to be efficient on complement activation. The characterization of porcine surface antigens demonstrated that IgM human XAbs, before and after BAL exposure, recognized xenoantigens on PAECs with similar molecular weights, suggesting that the same population of XAbs were present in the patients before and after exposure to pig antigens. CONCLUSIONS: Repetitive exposure of humans to porcine antigens after BAL treatment, results in a strong IgG and IgM XAb responses that are primarily directed against the alphaGal epitope. These XAbs are cytotoxic to PAECs and the IgG toxicity correlates with high IgG1 and IgG3 levels. Our data also suggest that no new XAb specificity emerges after porcine exposure.
BACKGROUND: There are limited experimental data on the nature of the humoral response elicited in humans against pig antigens. In this study, we have examined the xenoantibody (XAb) response in eight patients with acute liver failure exposed to pig hepatocytes after treatment with the bioartificial liver (BAL). METHODS:Patients' plasma samples obtained before and after BAL treatment were tested for IgM and IgG XAbs, IgG subclasses, and XAb cytotoxicity, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and flow-cytometric assays. The characterization of pig aortic endothelial cell (PAEC) surface xenoantigens was analyzed by immunoprecipitation. RESULTS: We observed by day 10, a strong anti-pig IgG and IgM XAb response in patients undergoing two or more BAL treatments, with a significant increase in all the IgG subclasses; in contrast, XAb titers did not change if the patients received only one BAL treatment. The majority of the XAbs produced to porcine antigens were primarily specific for the alphaGal epitope. Both IgG and IgM XAbs were cytotoxic to PAECs, and the cytotoxic activity of IgG was associated with high levels of IgG1 and IgG3 subclasses, known to be efficient on complement activation. The characterization of porcine surface antigens demonstrated that IgM human XAbs, before and after BAL exposure, recognized xenoantigens on PAECs with similar molecular weights, suggesting that the same population of XAbs were present in the patients before and after exposure to pig antigens. CONCLUSIONS: Repetitive exposure of humans to porcine antigens after BAL treatment, results in a strong IgG and IgM XAb responses that are primarily directed against the alphaGal epitope. These XAbs are cytotoxic to PAECs and the IgG toxicity correlates with high IgG1 and IgG3 levels. Our data also suggest that no new XAb specificity emerges after porcine exposure.
Authors: Yue Yu; James E Fisher; Joseph B Lillegard; Brian Rodysill; Bruce Amiot; Scott L Nyberg Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Qi Li; Hidetaka Hara; Zhongqiang Zhang; Michael E Breimer; Yi Wang; David K C Cooper Journal: Xenotransplantation Date: 2018-04-14 Impact factor: 3.907
Authors: Andreas G Katopodis; Richard G Warner; Rudolf O Duthaler; Markus B Streiff; Armin Bruelisauer; Olivier Kretz; Birgit Dorobek; Elke Persohn; Hendrik Andres; Alain Schweitzer; Gebhard Thoma; Willy Kinzy; Valerie F J Quesniaux; Emanuele Cozzi; Hugh F S Davies; Rafael Mañez; David White Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: John M Stewart; Alice F Tarantal; Yan Chen; Nancy C Appleby; Tania I Fuentes; C Chang I Lee; Evelyn J Salvaris; Anthony J F d'Apice; Peter J Cowan; Mary Kearns-Jonker Journal: Xenotransplantation Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 3.907
Authors: Satdarshan P S Monga; Mariah S Hout; Matt J Baun; Amanda Micsenyi; Peggy Muller; Lekha Tummalapalli; Aarati R Ranade; Jian-Hua Luo; Stephen C Strom; Jörg C Gerlach Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Annette Kleihauer; Clare R Gregory; Dominic C Borie; Andrew E Kyles; Irina Shulkin; Insiyyah Patanwala; Joanne Zahorsky-Reeves; Vaughn A Starnes; Yoko Mullen; Ivan T Todorov; Mary Kearns-Jonker Journal: Immunology Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 7.397
Authors: David K C Cooper; Ke-Feng Dou; Kai-Shan Tao; Zhao-Xu Yang; A Joseph Tector; Burcin Ekser Journal: Transplantation Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 4.939